O's sign Duchscherer

According to The Baltimore Sun's Dan Connolly, via Orioles Insider, the Orioles have signed veteran right-hander Justin Duchscherer to a one-year deal. Duchscherer, who wants to pitch in the rotation, apparently chose the O's over the Nationals and Mariners because they've guaranteed him a place on the roster as a starter.

Here are some of the details of Duchscherer's contract, detailed by Connolly:

He will make $700,000 in a base contract that will increase to $1.1 million whenever he is put on the 25-man roster (that will be pro-rated if it is later than Opening Day). He has incentives based on games started that will continue to build and eventually would bring his salary to $4.5 million if he makes 30 starts in 2011. He also has a standard awards bonus package which includes an additional $100,000 if he is named Comeback Player of the Year. His physical will be either Tuesday or Wednesday.

That certainly seems like a fair deal, especially if Duchscherer (33) can stay healthy and pitch like he did in 2008, when he had a 2.54 ERA in 141.2 innings. He won't strike out a lot of batters (6.87 K/9), but he won't walk many either (2.40 BB/9).

If Duchscherer can stay off of the disabled list and regain his pitching form, it'll give the O's a relatively cheap starting pitching option while also providing more time for Chris Tillman and Zach Britton to hone their skills in Triple-A. Duchscherer's signing also seemingly completes the O's Opening Day rotation that will likely include Brian Matusz, Jeremy Guthrie, Jake Arrieta, and Brad Bergesen.

Nick Young on road losing: "It can't be us every night"

Really, it was bound to happen, though I'm surprised it took the Wizards' 23rd straight road loss for a player to start complaining and pointing a finger at someone else. And that player was Nick Young, who, more or less, expressed some frustration after the team's most recent loss, a 107-93 beating in Memphis.

According to The Washington Post's Michael Lee, here's what Young had to say:

But after the Wizards lost . . . Nick Young openly questioned the play calling as he slipped on his sneakers in the visitor's locker room. Young was upset that the team had abandoned the scheme it had used the night before in Oklahoma City, when it pushed the Thunder to double overtime.

"I don't know. We don't stay consistent with play calling," Young said. "It's crazy. It can't be us all the time. The same thing we run against the Thunder, we came out with a different plan. It can't be us every night."

[. . .]

"We've got to be consistent really," Young said. "We got to work on just staying together really. I think that's what's making us go out there and play this way. Everyone feels they can change the game and be a game changer. We've just got to stay consistent with what we was running. We should've carried over what we had against the Thunder. We should've came out excited and ready to pump and going with the same routine."

Maybe Young is right. Maybe the Wizards coaching staff could call better plays and put the team in a better position to win. Many fans have been calling for Flip Saunders's job, believing that the Wizards should be playing better than they are and that Saunders hasn't done a very good job in his time in Washington.

But at the end of the day, players play and coaches coach. Young undoubtedly knows this and is disappointed with the constant losing on the road. But is Young really the guy who should be complaining about the plays that are called? In the double-overtime loss to the Thunder the other night, Young (32 points) took 33 shots -- 13 more than anyone on the team. He made just 13 of them. That's not terribly efficient basketball, but it's not surprising that Young favors the chance to take that many shots. Against the Grizzlies last night, Young made just two of nine shots and had eight points. (It's also worth noting that he played 28 minutes before leaving the game in the fourth quarter with a calf injury.) In two games, Young took 42 shots and made only 15 of them, yet he has the audacity to complain about play calling and possible coaching mistakes. Even if what he's saying has some truth to it -- and it does -- he didn't exactly pick the best time to make those comments.

For what it's worth, the Wizards shot 42.6 percent as a team against the Thunder. Against the Grizzlies, they shot 42.7 percent.

The Wizards' next two road games are at Dallas and at New Orleans, which won't provide any easy wins. The only light at the end of the tunnel appears to be a road game at Cleveland on February 13, but with a team that will probably be 0-25 on the road heading into that game, there is no such thing as a guaranteed victory.

At the end of the day, it's hard to be too upset with Young. Honestly, who wouldn't be frustrated after consistently losing on the road like this for nearly half a season? But Young -- and the entire team -- needs to play much better to eventually get that road win. And that means scoring 43 points on 42 shots in two games won't get the job done -- no matter the play calling.

Redskins QB conundrum

When it comes to the Redskins drafting a quarterback in the first round of the upcoming NFL Draft, most fans seem to be in one camp or the other: either feeling that 1) the Skins need to draft a quarterback early no matter what, or 2) completely opposing taking a quarterback at any point in the first round. I'm more in the middle ground: if they end up taking a quarterback, that's fine, but they should at least recognize and consider other possibilities (taking another position, picking the best player available, or trading down). That seems like a non-controversial position to take, but the Redskins do have a lot of problems to fix and are not one player away from contention.

NFL teams do not have a foolproof system of evaluating quarterbacks (or really anyone, for that matter). Except for a very select group of players, there is no sure-thing quarterback prospect. Plenty of immensely talented, early selected quarterbacks have failed spectacularly, and many others flourished after dropping to teams that were better able to utilize their talents and nurture their pro growth effectively.

Just take a look at Aaron Rodgers. Rodgers was thought to be one of the top quarterback prospects in the 2005 NFL Draft. In actuality, he was: He was the second quarterback taken overall after Alex Smith, who was selected No. 1 by the 49ers. But lots of teams passed on Rodgers -- they either weren't sold on his abilities or were content to fill other positions instead. Rodgers was finally selected by the Packers with the 24th selection. And yet, that was just the beginning. As the backup to Brett Favre for his first three seasons, Rodgers had plenty of time to be coached up on how to play the position properly. And when he finally received the full support of the entire Packers organization in 2008, Rodgers flourished. In his first three seasons, Rodgers has thrown for at least 3,922 yards and 28 touchdowns in each season. Now that's productivity.

But what would have happened if, for some reason, the 49ers had selected Rodgers instead of Smith? Would Rodgers have been as effective? Would he still be in the NFL? It's impossible to know, but each situation a quarterback is placed in is different. We'd like to think that a tremendously skilled quarterback would play well no matter what team he's on -- such as, would Peyton Manning be just as awesome if he were playing on the Redskins instead of the Colts. There are plenty of questions like that that just can't be answered.

While no one would argue that quarterback is not the most important position on the field, that doesn't mean that it's not important to still strive for a well-rounded team. Most of the best quarterbacks in the league are former first-round picks, but some can still be found later in the draft. Often it's about getting lucky, but that's what can happen when teams save their picks or acquire draft choices from other teams. The Redskins don't operate that way.

To shift gears a little bit, let's take a look at the top 15 quarterbacks this season in terms of QB ranking and in what spot they were drafted.

1. Tom Brady (6th round, No. 199)
2. Philip Rivers (1st, 4)
3. Aaron Rodgers (1st, 24)
4. Michael Vick (1st, 1)
5. Ben Roethlisberger (1st, 11)
6. Josh Freeman (1st, 17)
7. Joe Flacco (1st, 18)
8. Matt Cassel (7th, 230)
9. Matt Schaub (3rd, 90)
10. Peyton Manning (1st, 1)
11. Matt Ryan (1st, 3)
12. Drew Brees (2nd, 32)
13. David Garrard (4th, 108)
14. Jon Kitna (undrafted free agent)
15. Kyle Orton (4th, 106)

Of those 15 quarterbacks, eight were first-round picks. Also, two of the guys taken in later rounds were drafted by the Patriots, who seem to be pretty good at this whole drafting thing. (Also, three of the picks above were made by the Falcons, and two were made by the Chargers.) I'm not going to break down each quarterback and the situation he was drafted into -- especially since the list is only looking at a single year -- but I do think it's possible to draw a couple of conclusions:

1) If the Redskins held onto more of their draft picks, they could have taken more chances on late-round selections. Because the Skins trade away so many of their picks for other teams' older players, they rarely have the luxury of taking a chance on a player in the middle rounds. When they do have picks, they're under so much pressure to hit a home run because Redskins' teams of the last decade or so are usually old and also thin in terms of depth. Seldom do the Redskins have extra picks -- fewer draft choices mean fewer chances to unearth a hidden gem of a player.

2) It is possible to wait until after the first round to find a decent quarterback. He may not be able to start from day one and take charge of the offense immediately, but that guy can be found. That player may not be as gifted as the guys selected before him, so the team's offense may need to be built around his strengths. And that's something that the Redskins haven't done well -- e.g., making Donovan McNabb throw a ton of short passes rather than letting him throw deep more often.

3) For many, it comes down to nature vs. nurture -- do you believe that a talented player will find a way to be great no matter what, or do you think that the situation he's drafted into plays a huge role in his development? It's probably a combination of both, but no two players are the same.

I don't really have an overarching point in this discussion. Bad teams don't necessarily need to pigeonhole their first-round pick; there's nothing wrong with keeping an open mind and waiting to jump on a positive situation when it arises. Could Cam Newton end up being a solid quarterback? Sure. But if another team thinks so too and makes a solid offer to move into the Redskins' slot at No. 10 -- either for Newton or any other player --  the Skins should definitely be listening.

Mike and Kyle Shanahan would love to have a young, promising quarterback on the team's roster. But more than that, they want to win. The best way to do that is to keep getting rid of the old, overpaid players on the current roster and bringing in new, younger talent. If that means drafting a quarterback 10th, that's OK -- but the organization better hit on that pick, or else it's back to the drawing board yet again. Because when a team drafts a quarterback that early, they're investing lots of time and money into making sure that guy learns quickly and develops into the face of the franchise.

How Wall stacks up

I didn't get to watch the Wizards game last night -- a 124-117, double-overtime loss to the Oklahoma City Thunder that dropped the Wiz to 0-22 on the road -- but here are a few notes from the game:

- The short-handed Wizards definitely battled and made the Thunder earn that victory. With Kirk Hinrich still out and JaVale McGee dealing with the flu, four starters (Rashard Lewis, Trevor Booker, Nick Young, and John Wall) played at least 45 minutes each. The other starter, Andray Blatche, played 31. I'm not sure that that's the best way to distribute minutes or to prepare for a back-to-back -- the Wizards face the Grizzlies tonight -- but, then again, neither is playing in a double-overtime game in which the Wizards and Flip Saunders were desperately seeking their first road win.

- Back to Booker: The rookie had 21 points and 12 rebounds and made nine of his 11 shots from the field. He did foul out after playing 45 minutes, but he should definitely start receiving consistent minutes after an impressive performance like that. Then again, with all of the injuries, he'll probably keep seeing more minutes anyway. Saunders doesn't have much of a choice.

- Wall and Young both played 52 minutes, which is both impressive and sort of ridiculous. Wall had 13 points and 10 assists, but he only shot 5-19 from the field. Remarkably, though, he didn't turn the ball over. (More on Wall later.) Young was the Wizards' leading scorer with 32 points. Unfortunately, he needed 33 shots to get those points, and he made only 13 of those attempts.

- Finishing out the starting five, Lewis had 22 points and eight rebounds, and Blatche had 22 points and two -- yes, two -- rebounds. He did, though, have three assists and three steals.

- Only two bench players -- Yi Jianlian (28) and Al Thornton (20) -- played significant minutes. Yi scored nine points and grabbed 11 rebounds, and Thornton chipped in with six points. Mustafa Shakur, the team's de facto backup point guard with Hinrich out, played just six minutes.

- Other game notes: The Wizards only turned the ball over seven times. They were outrebounded 55-43 and out-assisted (not a word) 27-18. The Thunder also shot better from the field (49.4%-42.6%). The Thunder had 19 more fast-break points than the Wizards. So, basically, it seems that turnovers and sheer determination kept the Wizards in this game. I appreciate that they're battling, and at some point they're going to win a game on the road. But, seriously, 0-22 is really, really bad.

-----

So, yeah, another tough loss for the Wizards, but what I wanted to talk about was John Wall. He needs to be making more of his shots -- he's shooting under 40 percent from the field (39.6%) -- but as a rookie who has been playing well despite not being completely healthy, he's been very exciting to watch. Out of all rookies, he's second in scoring and first in assists. What I was curious about was how Wall's season so far stacks up to other top NBA point guards' rookie seasons. Again, Wall has played in only 33 games this season, but it's not hard believe that his current numbers could stay where they are for the rest of the season.

So let's take a look:

Player	Games	Pts	Reb	Ast	FG%	TO	Min
John Wall	33	15.0	4.0	9.4	39.6	3.8	37.1
Chris Paul	78	16.1	5.1	7.8	43.0	2.4	36.0
Deron Williams	80	10.8	2.4	4.5	42.1	1.8	28.4
Steve Nash	65	3.3	1.0	2.1	42.3	1.0	10.3
Rajon Rondo	78	6.4	3.7	3.8	41.8	1.8	23.3
Derrick Rose	81	16.8	3.9	6.3	47.5	2.5	37.0

I could have included several more point guards on this list, but I just went with those five. In terms of minutes played, only Paul and Rose really compare. Wall is averaging more assists than any of those guys did, but he's also shooting the lowest percentage from the field and turning the ball over more. Still, if Wall keeps putting up these kinds of numbers, there's no question that he should fit right in with these talented point guards.

The table doesn't include defense, and I didn't add steals because they don't necessarily demonstrate solid defense. Besides fewer turnovers and better shooting, Wall also needs to get better defensively. But that's something that comes with more experience and playing time, and it's not like the Wizards have a bunch of great defensive players behind Wall anyway. Wall certainly has the ability to improve at staying in front of his man and playing better pick-and-roll defense, and he'll get better at both. Then again, Nash isn't a very good defender and look where he is.

For what it's worth, the NBA record for most assists per game by a rookie is 10.6 by Mark Jackson in 1987-1988. In that season, Jackson appeared in all 82 games and played nearly 40 minutes per game. It would be an outstanding achievement if Wall could somehow average 10 assists in his rookie season, let alone approach Jackson's 10.6. Still, if Wall stays healthy and goes on some kind of second-half surge, it's at least possible.

Guerrero, O's still talking

Vladimir Guerrero doesn't exactly have a ton of options left in terms of suitors, so with the Orioles apparently interested in his services, he's listening. And that's what ESPN's Buster Olney is reporting -- that Guerrero and the O's are "making progress in their talks for a 2011 contract."

The O's have already made a few moves this offseason to upgrade the team's lineup (particularly the infield), such as trading for third baseman Mark Reynolds, dealing for shortstop J.J. Hardy, and signing first baseman Derrek Lee. However, Andy MacPhail doesn't appear to be done trying to fix the team's offense and may want Guerrero to be the team's designated hitter. If that happens, Luke Scott would likely see more time in left field since the O's need to keep his bat in the lineup. And that would be bad news for both Felix Pie and Nolan Reimold, who currently seem headed for a time-share role in left field. If Guerrero ends up in Baltimore, the O's could trade one, or both, for pitching depth.

Guerrero is 35, can only DH at this point in his career, and isn't likely to keep posting solid offensive numbers. (Not that a one-year deal is that big of a risk, obviously.) Meanwhile, Reimold is 27 and Pie is 25. Are the O's against giving those two a chance to see what they can do in a split-duty role, or is the team basically convinced at this point of what type of player each guy is?

It's not like the O's will have to break the bank for Guerrero -- they can probably sign him for a few million bucks. But if they do bring him to Baltimore, that may shut the door on the possibility of Reimold or Pie sticking around much longer (unless they both end up as bench guys, which doesn't seem likely).

Revisiting the Arenas-Lewis trade

It's been more than a month since the Wizards traded Gilbert Arenas to the Magic in exchange for Rashard Lewis, and it's still way too early to declare a winner or a loser in that deal (not to mention that the deal was obviously financially motivated). But so far, Arenas is having a much more difficult time adjusting to the Magic than Lewis is having with the not-as-talented Wizards.

Take a look at both Arenas's and Lewis's stats before and after the trade.

When	Gm	Min	Pts	Reb	Ast	FG%
Lewis Before	25	32.2	12.2	4.2	1.2	41.9
Lewis After	17	36.1	14.2	7.7	2.8	47.5

When	Gm	Min	Pts	Reb	Ast	FG%
Arenas Before	21	34.3	17.3	3.1	5.6	39.4
Arenas After	19	21.1	8.4	2.6	4.1	36.4

Lewis's numbers are better across the board. He's not just playing more minutes and taking advantage of that, but he's also shooting a higher percentage from the field. Arenas, meanwhile, has struggled mightily and is playing the fewest minutes per game of his career. He's also making just 36.4 percent of his shots, which obviously isn't very good at all.

Remember, of course, that this is only looking at the current season and just a small sample of games, so Lewis's numbers could drop off and Arenas could start playing better as he becomes more comfortable with his role on the Magic. But right now, even if the trade wasn't about Lewis replacing Arenas on the roster and making the Wizards better right now, Lewis is playing better overall and is doing a decent job filling in.

A plea to Shanahan and Allen

Now that the Redskins season has been over for a few weeks, much talk has centered around what the Skins will decide to do with their first-round pick (No. 10 overall). Obviously there are plenty of mock drafts to dissect, and some of them have the Redskins selecting Auburn quarterback Cam Newton at No. 10.

The first round of the NFL Draft is not until April 28, so scouting reports and mock drafts are going to drastically change in a few months. But the current Redskins team is old and has plenty of holes, and this draft is hugely important going forward in terms of shaping Mike Shanahan's and Bruce Allen's legacy in D.C.

Picking a franchise quarterback would be fantastic. The Redskins have not had a young, talented quarterback for a very long time, and there's no question that Shanahan will desperately be looking for a quarterback to mold and develop to his liking. But having a talented quarterback does not guarantee success. Not many people would argue that quarterback is the most important position on the field, or that having a solid quarterback is immensely important. But if the Redskins neglect the rest of the team's holes to draft a quarterback, they may not only risk taking a step back in the standings next season, but also hindering that quarterback's development (again, assuming that they don't surround him with the right pieces -- the Skins don't exactly have a ton of draft picks right now (6)).

Still, having a top quarterback does (usually) make things easier. Of all the quarterbacks who finished in the top 10 in terms of quarterback rating this season, seven made the playoffs. However, the No. 2 name on that list, Philip Rivers, threw for more yards than anyone else (4,710) and had the fifth-most touchdown passes (30), and his team still fell short of the playoffs despite having one of the best points differentials in the league.

Sure, that's just one example -- and a recent one at that. I'm also not going to go back over every draft and focus on which quarterbacks taken early were and were not busts. But unless the Redskins get lucky and select a truly elite quarterback like a Tom Brady or Peyton Manning -- not likely at all -- then it's important to keep building up the rest of the team and to not keep neglecting key areas like the offensive and defensive lines. If a team is well rounded and can compete with a mediocre quarterback, then there isn't much of a reason to draft a quarterback so early unless Shanahan and Allen -- whoever gets the final decision (Shanahan, probably) -- are completely convinced that guy is going to be a star.

Just take a look at the Jets and Bears. Are both of those teams a little lucky? Sure. The Jets sort of limped into the postseason before catching fire and taking down the Colts (a game they easily could have lost) and the Patriots (who the Jets outplayed). And the second-seeded Bears ended up facing a flawed Seahawks team in Chicago while the top-seeded Falcons were blown out at home by a determined Packers team. Would the Bears have faired as well hosting the Packers instead? We're about to find out this week. But that's beside the point. Aaron Rodgers and Ben Roethlisberger are elite quarterbacks, so it's not surprising to see their teams still alive at this point. But Jay Cutler and Mark Sanchez? They may be good quarterbacks, but neither would be considered great. This season, Cutler ranked 16th in quarterback rating (86.3) but did have 23 touchdowns to 16 interceptions. He was good -- but not great. Sanchez was even worse this season, finishing with the fifth-worst quarterback rating (75.3) while throwing 17 touchdowns and 13 interceptions. But both of those teams have been able to overcome their lack of a truly elite quarterback because they're able to do things like force turnovers, get pressure on opposing quarterbacks, and run the ball a little themselves on offense.

Of course, it's all about being able to build a franchise. The Redskins are not ready to compete for a championship; they need to add more pieces before that can happen. So all I'm trying to say is that the Redskins shouldn't reach for a quarterback so early in the draft if they're not sure he's the guy. Again, there's no guarantee the quarterback they select is going to be great, but there seems to be a little less pressure and difficulty in picking another position of need -- and the Redskins obviously have plenty of those.

I'm a fan of taking the best available player, and I think the Redskins should do that -- even if it's a quarterback. But they should also be exploring the possibility of taking any other position -- offense or defense -- or even trading back to replenish some of the picks they gave away when trading for Donovan McNabb and Jammal Brown.

In the end, if the Redskins do decide that Newton is the guy, that's fine. But he's not going to be the team's savior with so many other gaping holes on the roster, and it would be wrong of them to believe that. Shanahan and Allen have a ton of work to do, and hopefully they are not solely focused on finding a quarterback. This team needs much more help than that.

O's avoid arbitration with four; two remain

During the last few days, the Orioles agreed to terms (and avoided arbitration) with four of their six arbitration-eligible players. Here are those players, the salary they were paid last year, and the salary they will make in 2011, via Orioles Insider:

Adam Jones: $465,000, $3.25 million
Jim Johnson: $440,000, $975,000
Felix Pie: $420,000, $985,000
J.J. Hardy: $5.1 million, $5.85 million

Jeremy Guthrie and Luke Scott have yet to reach an agreement with the O's, but each will likely sign shortly.